Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Colitis, a Rising Issue in Targeted Cancer Therapy Era: A Literature Review.

Research advances in the oncology treatment field have led to the widespread use of immunotherapy. The usage of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) has improved the survival of cancer patients with metastases. This has also led to the rapidly expanding indications for ICI use. However, ICI usage may lead to toxicity, which may be immune-related, in different organ-specific targets. The immune-related adverse events (irAEs) of ICI may lead to increased morbidity, decreased quality of life, and early termination of ICI. The clinical manifestations of irAEs in the gastrointestinal system are variable, ranging from self-limited to life-threatening or fatal events. In this review article, we would like to focus on discussing ICI-induced colitis, which is one of the most common ICI irAEs in the gastrointestinal tract.

Colorectal cancer screening guidelines for average-risk and high-risk individuals: A systematic review.

AIMS: This review aims to summarize the different colorectal cancer guidelines for average-risk and high-risk individuals from various countries. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search regarding guidelines, consensus recommendations, or position statements about colorectal cancer screening published within the last 10 years (1st January 2012 to 27th August 2022), was performed at EBSCOhost, JSTOR, PubMed, ProQuest, SAGE, and ScienceDirect. RESULTS: A total of 18 guidelines were included in this review. Most guidelines recommended screening between 45 and 75 years for average-risk individuals. Recommendations regarding colorectal cancer screening in high-risk individuals were more varied and depended on the risk factor. For high-risk individuals with a positive family history of colorectal cancer or advanced colorectal polyp, screening should begin at age 40. Some frequently suggested screening modalities in order of frequency are colonoscopy, FIT, and CTC. Furthermore, several screening intervals were suggested, including colonoscopy every 10 years for average-risk and every 5-10 years for high-risk individuals, FIT annually in average-risk and every 1-2 years in high-risk individuals, and CTC every five years for all individuals. CONCLUSION: All individuals with average-risk should undergo colorectal cancer screening between 45 and 75. Meanwhile, individuals with higher risks, such as those with a positive family history, should begin screening at age 40. Several recommended screening modalities were suggested, including colonoscopy every 10 years in average-risk and every 5-10 years in high-risk, FIT annually in average-risk and every 1-2 years in high-risk, and CTC every five years.

The predictive value of PRDM2 in solid tumor: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Many studies have reported the presence of Positive Regulatory/Su(var)3-9, Enhancer-of-zeste and Trithorax Domain 2 (PRDM2) downregulation in cancer. However, its potential as a diagnostic biomarker is still unclear. Hence, a systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to address this issue. INTRODUCTION: As of 2018, cancer has become the second leading cause of death worldwide. Thus, cancer control is exceptionally vital in reducing mortality. One such example is through early diagnosis of cancer using tumor biomarkers. Having a function as a tumor suppressor gene (TSG), PRDM2 has been linked with carcinogenesis in several solid tumor. This study aims to assess the relationship between PRDM2 downregulation and solid tumor, its relationship with clinicopathological data, and its potential as a diagnostic biomarker. This study also aims to evaluate the quality of the studies, data reliability and confidence in cumulative evidence. MATERIALS & METHODS: A protocol of this study is registered at the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) with the following registration number: CRD42019132156. PRISMA was used as a guideline to conduct this review. A comprehensive electronic search was performed from inception to June 2019 in Pubmed, Cochrane Library, ProQuest, EBSCO and ScienceDirect. Studies were screened and included studies were identified based on the criteria made. Finally, data synthesis and quality assessment were conducted. RESULTS: There is a significant relationship between PRDM2 downregulation with solid tumor (RR 4.29, 95% CI [2.58-7.13], P < 0.00001). The overall sensitivity and specificity of PRDM2 downregulation in solid tumors is 84% (95% CI [39-98%]) and 86% (95% CI [71-94%]), respectively. There is a low risk of bias for the studies used. TSA results suggested the presence of marked imprecision. The overall quality of evidence for this study is very low. DISCUSSION: We present the first meta-analysis that investigated the potential of PRDM2 downregulation as a diagnostic biomarker in solid tumor. In line with previous studies, our results demonstrated that PRDM2 downregulation occurs in solid tumor. A major source of limitation in this study is the small number of studies. CONCLUSIONS: Our review suggested that PRDM2 is downregulated in solid tumor. The relationship between PRDM2 downregulation and clinicopathological data is still inconclusive. Although the sensitivity and specificity of PRDM2 downregulation are imprecise, its high values, in addition to the evidence that suggested PRDM2 downregulation in solid tumor, hinted that it might still have a potential to be used as a diagnostic biomarker. In order to further strengthen these findings, more research regarding PRDM2 in solid tumors are encouraged.